Re Re Re: Strategy

[Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it>]

Goog morning, Fred.

I should not write my posts in the evening, or at
night, but only at morning when ideas are fresher..

So, let me add now a little improvement to what I
replied on yesterday evening.  In red, below:



Fred Gohlke ha scritto:
> Good Morning, Antonio
>
> I believe you are distinguishing between our natural tendency to
> pursue our own interest and the forces that cause us to pursue our own
> interest; indeed, the forces that cause us to form our opinion about
> what constitutes our own interest.
> I take it you are saying we must uncover the forces that cause us to
> define and pursue our own interest and find a way
> to combat them.

Good Night, Fred

Yes, I am on that track.

Consider one's pursuing one's own interest according
with the requirements- to wit, the physical laws - of
the natural environment one lives in.

Consider one's pursuing one's own interest according
with the requirements - to wit, the authority's consent -
of the social environment one lives in.

Consider that there is conflict between the social and
the natural requirements of the complex environment one
lives in.  For instance, a complex environment where the
social authority requires consumerism, or else war, and
the physical laws require respectfulness for natural
resources and peace.

Or else, nearer to the aims of this esteemed list,
please consider a conflict between
-- our allegiance to social authorities who want us to
accomplish good policies that have been decided by
themselves, ie top-down,   and
-- our allegiance to natural environment that requires
us to accomplish policies that are directly linked to the
territory we live in, ie decided from bottom-up.
Isn't it this the difference between representative and
direct democracy?

(all the remaining post follows unchanged, cheers)

My opinion is, more criticism to the authority's requirements
coul be the case.
Now the problem becomes, how to decrease one's own
dependence on the authority's consent.  This decrease goes
along with one's own interest


>
> I had not previously considered that perspective.  Clearly, I can not
> refute the notion  that whatever causes us to pursue our own interest
> is more fundamental than the pursuit, itself.  However, at first blush,
>  it seems to me those forces might be primal, and, as such, beyond
> our means to control.

"Primal" does not mean "beyond our means to control",  IMHO

> It is my opinion that the pursuit of self-interest is not far removed
> from the need for self-preservation, and self-preservation  is
> instinctual.

I totally agree.  Now, let's account the policies one may
implement for self-preservation.  Maybe we obey  the
requirements coming from the natural environment.
Maybe we obey the authority's requirements for consent.
Here, the necessary self-control wants us to perform some
"questioning the authority" training and conscious attitude.


>
> Since I have not considered this perspective, I have no idea
> how we could go about  harnessing such elementary forces.
> Do you have a suggestion I could consider?

Try at
http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/common/Antonio.Lucknow.ppt
and also at:
http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/rossin10.htm
or else at;
www.flexible-learning.org
>
>
> >> Harnessing the pursuit of self-interest will be a painstaking
> >> task.
> >
> > I think this goal would be a counter natural one, not to say
> > suicidal.
>
> I hope you will keep an open mind on this topic.  Devising an
> electoral method that makes it beneficial and wise for a person
> seeking political advancement to maintain their integrity, though
> difficult, may not be impossible.  Refusing to consider the
> possibility will, of course, preclude it.

Ok., try at www.simpol.org
>
> Fred Gohlke
>
> [Based on our preceding exchange of messages (I received your message
> twice), it appears all we have to do is address our messages to the
> WDDM site, and it takes care of distributing them.  Neat ... but I
> wish they were also displayed on-line on the WEEM site where they
> could be considered by members, in toto.  flg]
>

Sounds nice.

Cheers,
antonio, going to sleep
>